Defense is Mr. David Coombs,, Major Matthew Kemkes, and Captain Paul Bouchard. ,

There were around 500 protesters outside the gates of Fort Meade on Saturday, Dec 17, 2011. #Occupy Wall Street had sent down a bus, and there were two bus loads from #Occupy in DC, both Freedom Plaza and McPherson. In addition Veterans for Peace were present at the rally and members of the Bradley Manning Support network. Individuals were represented from all over the country, and even the world.

I arrived at Fort Meade, Maryland at 1:20 p.m. and rushed into the theater just as defense was questioning the day's second witness, Special Agent Calder Robinson's testimony, via telephone from Germany.

After his testimony a recess was called and I conferred with four individuals about the morning's proceedings and the first witness that day, Special Agent Toni Graham.

Robertson:I collected hard drives; another special agent did everything else.

Defense: Why didn't you travel from Germany to Iraq?

Robertson: The items came sealed.

Defense: Are you sure only Manning used the devices? Do you know if this computer was assigned to Manning?

Robertson: I took word of investigating authorities.

Defense: So you don't know if other individuals used the computers?

Robertson: No.

Defense: What is the difference between imaging and full forensic?

Robertson: Full forensics takes months. It's a scientific process. I did preliminary analysis not full forensics.

Defense: At the time of investigation were your certifications up to standing?

Robertson: Yes.

Robertson: I did all the forensic imaging.

Defense: Take Notes?

[I could not hear the answer.]

Defense: Cat Card access?

Robertson: Not sure.

Defense: Beyond forensic imaging and preliminary forensic, you did not do full forensic?

Robertson: That's right. Cat Card access done during full forensics.

Defense: Were the computers password protected?

Robertson: On PFC Manning personal computer, no. On all others, yes.

Defense: Did you instruct Cpt. Thomas Chirepko (unsure of spelling) on how to conduct forensic investigations?

Robertson: I did not, people on my team may have instructed him.

Defense: Is that a typical practice, to instruct people on how to obtain network logs?

Robertson: Yes, it is customary practice to obtain network logs.

Defense: Did you send software products or instructions to Cpt. Thomas Chirepko (unsure of spelling).

Robertson: Don't recall.

Defense: Did you come across evidence PFC Manning suffered from gender identity disorder?

Robertson: I am not qualified to make determination.

Defense: That he wanted to become Brianna Manning? Familiar with the name?

Robertson: I knew PFC Manning had behaviors. I know he referred to himself as 'fragile' in chat logs.

Defense: Any evidence he was homosexual?

Robertson: I don't know how to answer that question.

Defense: During your examination did you come across any evidence that PFC Manning was homosexual?

Robertson: I don't know.

Defense: You either know or you don't.

[Objection raised by prosecution as to relevance.]

IO: If you could keep questions to evidence, as to what he found. Special Agent Robertson, please answer question.

Defense: Did you come across any evidence PFC Manning was gay?

Defense: Are you familiar with the global address list?

Robertson: Yes.

Defense: Part of your work?

Robertson: No.

Defense: Come across this?

Robertson: I don't know.

Defense: On computers you worked on were there multiple user profiles?

Robertson: I don't recall.

[Prosecution re-examines the witness.]

Prosecution: Who was Cpt. Thomas Chirepko (unsure of spelling), and what did he do?

Robertson: He secured some network logs, which are official communications between computers.

Prosecution: So no imaging?

Robertson: Not to my knowledge.

Prosecution: Why did you not travel to Iraq?

Robertson: It was determined that it was not needed.

IO: Thank you Special Agent Robertson. You are permanently excused. Please do not discuss this case. If someone tries to discuss this case with you, please report it to counsel.

[Recess was taken.]

At the end of Special Agent Robertson's testimony a recess was called and I moved over to the courthouse.

In the gallery sit Julian Assange's external counsel Jennifer Robinson, and Amanda Jacobsen from the Center for Constitutional Rights, who both filed a writ the previous day demanding WikiLeaks lawyers be granted access to Bradley Manning's proceedings.

Towards the end of the day Ray McGovern sat behind me and Daniel Choi to my left. Mr. McGovern introduced himself, and we spoke about #Occupy and US Day of Rage. He gave Bradley Manning the thumbs up, when Bradley arrived in the courtroom.

[Hearing called to order. Third witness, Special Agent Mark Mander. In person. ]

Mander: Initial investigation started by Camp Liberty, then CCIU became involved.

Prosecution: Role?

Mander: Case Agent on investigation.

Prosecution: Why Iraq and not CCIU?

Mander: Initial allocation was Iraq because that is where the crimes were committed. That is the policy of one office, relating to another. Initially opened by the office in the vicinity of the crime.

Prosecution: Why was it transferred?

Mander: It was determined that for search warrants and special warrants needed from a Federal judge [He mentions Google and Twitter], comus (sp.) leads, and the technical nature of the matter more suited to CCIU. Items were custodian'ed from Iraq to Dulles International Airport. I inventoried all items and carried them into the CCIU room. The majority of the investigation plan was based on Lamo of Manning and other documents obtained from PFC Manning's personnel file. CCIU obtained chats from Mr. Lamo and collected computer belonging to Mr. Lamo...on those hard drives.

Prosecution: Found anywhere else?

Mander: I believe corresponding info found from PFC Manning...

Prosecutor: What did you find?

Mander: 2007 Apache air strike video, info about Afghan war logs, detainees of GTMO, mentions of state dept cables.

Prosecutor: What did CID do?

[So to clarify, he is saying that the information was from the chat logs. And the next part he was talking very fast was him saying how they investigated based on that 'Intel']

Mander: Garani video believed to have been on shared -- by CENTCOM. Initially, CCIU attempted to connect and download those documents and that was collected as evidence. CCIU determined it was not sufficient. So CCIU sent two agents to CENTCOM in Florida where they obtained log files related to investigation. Several weeks later Deputy SJA Schoenettles (sp.) provided background info on Garani air strike. The file was BE2PAX.zip. That file was believed to be Garani air strike video. Lamo contacted us and related that he became aware on the Internet of someone that he did not know, who was part of the original decryption effort, who worked for DO[E or D ?], which we believed was Manning.

Prosecution: How did you verify?

Mander: Lamo was able to...Mr. Jason Katz. Mr. Jason Katz had previously been identified as an employee of Brookhaven National Labs. He was employed February 2009 to March 2010. His reason for being fired was for engaging in inappropriate computer activity. We additionally obtained forensic imaging, which was authorization by a network connection agreement with his government assigned and personal computer.

Prosecution: Did CID get authorization to search?

Mander: CID and the FBI obtained a Federal warrant to search, and did that search on the government work station

Mander: The file was identical. The file was named 'B.zip' within that file was another file named EEZPAX.wmb (Mander wasn't sure about .wmb) video file.

The file was encrypted and password protected. The file appeared to be same video.

The second week of June, two CCIU agents obtained circle log files...obtained IP locations of where the State
Department stored... obtained firewall logs.

During an initial attempt to get log files one person at State Dept said Intelink. Intelink allows people to find classified docs.

Prosecution: Did CID collect logs from Intelink?

Mander: Collected disk from personnel there, from IP address of the government workstation...Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI).

Prosecution: Did you collect logs from CIA?

Mander: Yes.

Prosecution: Did you try to collect more from ODNI?

Mander: Keywords people searched. Also CENTAUR logs based on IP address.

Mander: CENTAUR is a government name for NetFlow logs. Connection logs to and from, time and date, length...

Prosecution: What sorts of leads did you pursue?

Mander: About June 18, 2010 I was involved in contacting and interviewing Manning's aunt. She was identified through his personnel file. Myself and four other agents, as well as Dept of State interviewed her about what she may know. We discussed a wide range of topics: family, where his mother was from, how he was brought up, and the circumstances of enlistment prior to apprehension. Manning had contacted his aunt two times while in Iraq: to ask her about the 2007 Apache video, and secondly to ask her to make a posting referencing the 2007 Apache video.

Prosecution: Did you search that residence, since it was the place of residence in his personnel file?

Mander: Yes. His belongings were obtained in a basement room. We looked through that room, and specifically for digital media, as well as anything he sent her while in Iraq. Upstairs in her room was a computer powered on while he was in Iraq. She could not use that computer.

Prosecution: Did you collect that?

Mander: Yes.

Prosecution: Visit again?

Mander: Yes.

Mander: In October a package came from the confinement center in Kuwait. After Manning's apprehension and confinement they collect his personals. The facility said that we needed a warrant to search those belongings. There was a hold up with the administration. The authorizing authority for the warrant said we shouldn't need one. By that time we got that figured out, Manning was transferred, and his effects were sent to his aunt's home, and signed by his dad.

Prosecution: What did the aunt tell you?

Mander: She had the unopened box. She saved the box and allowed us to go into basement to find other items.

Prosecution: Find anything else?

Mander: Yes. In June when we searched the room, it had no organization. She had organized his items into plastic containers. We identified numerous items that were digital media. All those items were selected. Most important, on an SD card we found various classified data. We split the room into two parts, photographed were item were found, and placed those items on the bed. When we were done we asked his aunt if she could look at items, and verify that they were his.

Mander: She verified them.

[Defense cross-examines Special Agent Mark Mander.]

Defense: You are a case agent?

Mander: Yes.

Defense: Lead case agent?

Mander: Normally in CID there is typically one agent. A case agent manages leads in case. Because of the numerous locations of investigation activity, in this instance I was the case agent on paper...supervisors took more active role.

Mander: Agent Aims and Agent King were acting operations officers.

Defense: Primary roles?

Mander: Search authorization, interviews and administrative tasks.

Defense: Not just search authorizations but federal magistrates?

Mander: In some cases at his aunt's house, we collected the items with her consent and then searched for authorization later.

Defense: So when talking about analysis on media in Iraq?

Mander: No. Special Agent Schaller (sp.), Johnson, and {another) Special Agent (I did not get his/her name).

Defense: Regarding Lamo, the detainees at GTMO, the Garani air strike, the 2007 Apache video, all that you did not see?

Mander: I did not conduct analysis.

Defense: So which agent did analyze the path to Garani?

Mander: Agent Wilbur (sp.) CCIU. At this time, I do not remember the report.

Mander: Special Agent Aims was my supervisor. The others were peers.

Defense: You were not directing them?

Mander: No

Defense: Did you have any interaction with Mr. Katz or Mr. Lamo?

Mander: Mr. Lamo contacted Special Agent Edward at CCIU. Mr. Katz...I don't believe CCIU directed Mr. Katz. That was FBI. I do not know if Mr. Katz contacted Mr. Lamo. I do not know if they had direct contact.

Defense: When did Lamo start to cooperate with CID?

Mander: Probably at end of May 2010...

Defense: Regarding the cables: Two agents went to the Department of State, did you accompany them?

Mander: No. The first group went to collect; the second was provided by the State Department.

Defense: So this is just from reports?

Mander: No.

Defense: Why would his childhood be relevant to the investigation?

Mander: It turned out not to be. Friendships he may have had...there was a great deal of concern about a foreign intelligence service. We were looking for information to prosecute. Were others involved? Military records showed Manning had lived overseas prior joining Army.

Defense: Were other people contacted or interviewed by CID?

Mander: A fair number.

Defense: Anyone followed up? Some people told me you interviewed them five or six times, and they were irritated. Is that typical?

Mander: No. It is not typical. This was not a typical investigation. One issue there was no forensics, or they were ongoing. Agents were collecting information thought to be relevant, and then we would go back with new information. That was the reason for the numerous visits.

Defense: And is it true that this was the only case you were working on? How long?

Mander: Yes. June 9 - Nov 2011 I had at times other cases, and would try to keep up, while on this case.

Defense: Whom else did you uncover doing wrongdoing?

Mander: Seven other civilians. The FBI is potentially involved. I do not know what the FBI has determined.

Defense: Do they include the founders, owners, or managers of WikiLeaks? Was WikiLeaks in this case?

Mander: Yes they are involved in certain aspects.

Defense: Is it your determination, would you agree that my client would have been unable to do this by himself?

Defense: Did my client possess the ability to upload from his cubical in Iraq?

Mander: Yes. He could have upload to multiple sites.

Defense: Would he not also require the cooperation of others to post to (indecipherable)?

Mander: Not if he owned site. Mr. Lamo contacted CCIU about Mr. Katz boasting about helping to decrypt. Lamo contacted CCIU about an unknown individual who was chatting with someone else. Don't know if he ever met that person.

Defense: How was he aware?

Mander: I am not aware.

Defense: Was he working with CID at the time? Before or after?

Mander: His initial information started the investigation. A person Lamo talked to told two people: Someone on a project he had worked on, and a friend. Both of those people told law enforcement. One was in the Army. The other sent an email to our office account, and left his name.

Defense: Did Lamo receive benefit?

Mander: Not that I am aware.

Defense: Who is the primary lead CCIU for WikiLeaks?

Mander: Camp Liberty, Army CID and the Department of State. Then the FBI became involved and joined the investigation. The State Department became involved immediately because of nature of information obtained in chats. A month into the investigation the FBI became involved.

Defense: What about the Department of Justice started to investigate WikiLeaks?

Mander: They spoke with advisers early in our investigation...one US attorney from the Eastern District of Virginia.

Defense: You mentioned that when PFC Manning was confined in Kuwait, can you provide details of the search authorization?

Mander: We identified the container. We contacted the Kuwait facility to search, had and agent from CID in Kuwait to collect. The facility said we needed to have a search warrant. We contacted a magistrate. There was a legal disagreement. The magistrate felt we did not need authorization due to his status as confinee. We went back to facility, but only in regard to "safety and security"...violations of his confinement strategy, but by the time we figured that out, he had been transferred.

Mander: Again, forensic examination is a slow process, as items of investigation were reported, we would contact ex co-workers and ask if they knew about the information. That was how did the process worked.

Prosecution: Why?

Mander: We were trying to identify all the evidence related to this investigation.

[Special Agent Mark Mander is excused.]

[Defense renewed its request to compel collateral evidence from DOJ.]

Defense (Coombs): As defense requested...R.C.M. 45 collateral investigation of evidence by government...this agent...that was the FBI. Prosecutor deemed to have knowledge...clearly that is the case...defense should not be operating in an information vacuum. I request you obtain information in possession by the prosecution for the defense.

[Prosecution or Investigating Officer (IO) (?) asks, "The US government does not have the approval to turn over such evidence in possession of the FBI."]

Defense (Coombs): What exactly does the government have? One. Does it exist? Two. Do they have authorization? If you deem it irrelevant, it does not stop at trial counsel. I would like that to go on record...and disclose the State Department, FBI, and DOJ.

IO: At this point your request is denied.

Defense (Coombs): It's not relevant?

IO: No. You can bring it up with the judge when or if the matter goes to trial.

[Fourth witness. Special Agent Troy Bettencourt (sp.). Testimony was accompanied by visual projection of two archives of the WikiLeaks Web site and three screenshots of @WikiLeaks tweets.]

Prosecution: Where do you work?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : The US Treasury.

Prosecution: What kind work?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : Forensics for civil, criminal interaction. I was an Army CID prior to my current position...from November 2010 to December 2011 and then previously from 2001 to 2005.

Prosecution: What was your job?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : I was a special agent on the intrusion team assigned to this.

Prosecution: What training have you completed?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : I have completed courses from the government and commercial providers...NCay...Access Data...DC3...

Prosecution: Have you ever testified?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : Yes...cyber crimes...general crimes.

Prosecution: What is wikileaks.org?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : WikiLeaks was founded in 2006 by an Australian national...bound to no government entity.
The same time the organization existed, the web site existed...they solicit classified, decrypted...

Prosecution: How does one submit to the web site?

[Special Agent Troy Bettencourt then goes through a user flow process that he describes as the WikiLeaks submission process...]

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : You initiate...the Web site scans your computer for the file to upload...

Prosecution: WikiLeaks is a Web site?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : Yes, on the technical side it is a Web site.

Prosecution: Where are its servers?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : All over the world: Germany, Sweden, (names more countries) even Texas.

Prosecution: Where is it fiscally based?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : Wherever Mr. Assange is located. At one time it was Iceland. Now it is England.

[Special Agent Troy Bettencourt then explains the Way Back machine. On a projected screen are shown two Web archives he identifies as from May ?, 2010 and then November 5, 2009. I could not find an specific enough date for the May archive online, since I did not get the day, and there was no WikiLeaks archive available online dated November 5, 2009.]

[Prosecution shows archive of WikiLeaks Web site displaying a country listings and stops scrolling at the United States under which is a bullet points list that includes: Intellipedia, http://opensource.gov and more. Under military intelligence on the 'Most Wanted List' we see featured CIA, detainee interrogations, rules of engagement, Camp Delta, and more. Special Agent Troy Bettencourt reads allowed what is shown on the screen. At one point the Investigating Officer asks that the prosecution and Special Agent Troy Bettencourt to slow down and repeat themselves, saying that they are going too fast.]

Prosecution: Did WikiLeaks ever use social media?

Special Agent Troy Bettencourt : Yes...very much. They still do.

Prosecution: What is twitter?

[Special Agent Troy Bettencourt answers. I did not write his answer down.]

[NB Screenshots of WikiLeaks tweets showed an older version of the WikiLeaks logo, but one that had "Free Bradley" in it. I cannot confirm that Bradley Manning noticed the banner.]

[Witness are not allowed to use notes while testifying, but the court cannot verify by telephone.]

Madrid: No.

[IO gives speech regarding notifying him if his answer is classified.]

Prosecution: When did you retired?

Madrid: Sept 1, 2010

Prosecution: How many years?

Madrid: 2 years. I work on BMI systems to exploitation...PDA, laptop, phones.

Prosecution: How do you know Manning?

Madrid: I was his Platoon Sergeant.

Prosecution: When did Manning attend...?

Madrid: April to August 2008

Prosecution: Platoon Sergeant?

Madrid: February 08 to August 10

Prosecution: MOS?

Madrid: 35 Foxtrot Military Intelligence Analyst.

Prosecution: What is the first instruction?

Madrid: Info sec...how to handle and contain classification.

Prosecution: How do you know?

Madrid: I would talk to instructors.

Prosecution: Do you need interim clearance for class?

Madrid: Yes. It's a temporary classification.

[Prosecution asks a line of questions that lead Madrid to say in June 2008 he gave corrective training to Manning.]

Prosecution: Reason for corrective training?

Madrid: Soldiers informed me that Manning was hosting videos on YouTube with titles like "Classified" "SCIF" and "Top Secret"...Soldiers said they saw three videos...I couldn't access YouTube through my work computer, so I viewed only one on of these videos on one of the soldier's laptop. This one video was meant for family and friends of PFC Manning inside barracks room, "Well I work at this super secret SCIF, I handle...."

Prosecution: What was your corrective training?

Madrid: Presentation for Friday formation. Soldier needed to present it to me first to make sure its an informative product.

Prosecution: Other?

Madrid: A typed out product that he understood he wasn't suppose to do that sort of thing...divulge his clearance would make himself a target...and a PowerPoint for Friday formation.

Prosecution: Presentation for the unit what was that?

Madrid: Infosec. How to handle it; if you are a person with access...how it could be dangerous. There are sources looking for info on military. Different types: foreign governments, enemies, spies, and hackers. Written product had references to regulations.

[Defense cross-examines Sergeant First Class Brian Madrid.]

Defense We spoke on the phone before?

Madrid: Yes.

Defense Platoon Sergeant at AIT?

Madrid: Yes.

Defense How long is the course?

Madrid: 16 weeks 3 days.

Defense Part in field, part in classroom?

Madrid: Yes.

Defense Lots of students, probably hard to get to know them all?

Madrid: Don't get to know all...But you know them.

[Defense asks how much he actually participated in the class with soldiers being trained vis a vis field. Madrid says he attends classes with soldiers.]

Defense When (Advanced Individual Training) AIT graduate they have a baseline understanding. Reasonable?

Madrid: Yes.

Madrid: Unreasonable to say they are an expert, but they are qualified by doctrine and standards.

Lim: 2nd Brigade Military Intelligence (MI) Company Command... Deployed three times... Two times as Intel... All deployments to Iraq... Final Fob Hammer, Iraq.

Prosecution: When did you arrive?

Lim: March of 2006.

Prosecution: Position?

Lim: Infantry Battalion S2

Prosecution: What did you do?

Lim: Used my small staff of Intel analysts with combat Intel officer for operations. October 2008 and July 2009. We did two rotations six or seven months. We were going to go to Afghanistan. My job...Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) major units...to validate prior to deployment.

Prosecution: Could you get onto network in SCIF? Did you have SIPRnet?

Lim: Yes.

Prosecution: What else?

Lim: NIPRnet and SIPRnet...

Prosecution: SIPRnet secret?

Lim: Yes.

Prosecution: D6 Secret?

Lim: Yes.

Prosecution: Were computers you had on network?

Lim: Yes.

Prosecution: Classified hard drives?

Lim: Yes. We had info that was releasable to Iraqis, translated for Iraqi soldier in Arabic.

Lim: That was a specific caveat. We partnered with Iraq. We were authorized to release that information to Iraqi defense forces, because that was part of our mission to train the Iraqi's how to use information and to share information with Iraqis.

Defense (Coombs): You received a letter of admonishment from [General Robert L.] Caslen on March 2, 2011?

[Defense quotes letter] 'You should have been aware of Master Sgt. Paul Adkins from case and the discipline of enlisted soldiers." Master Sgt. Paul Adkins never shared that information till after?

Lim: I was fairly concerned.

Defense (Coombs): Shocked?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): What did you do?

Lim: I counseled him. [General Robert L.] Caslen

Defense (Coombs): Did you shared with him the email that PFC Manning wrote to Master Sgt. Paul Adkins with a picture of himself dressed as a woman...and how his gender identity affects him? How it impacts his ability to think in April 2010. That the letter was not shared with you till after the arrest of PFC Manning?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did you counsel him in writing?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): You said it was obvious Manning was suffering from the 2009 email. Should his security clearance have been removed, and he removed from the SCIF?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Fair to say that the later offense may not have happened?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): And, these offenses (charges) may not have happened?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did Master Sgt. Paul Adkins have duty to report a 'derog'?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did these concerns predate deployment?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): How quickly could you turn off access? Immediately?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Did the SCIF have Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)?

Lim: Told there was one, never saw it.

Defense (Coombs): Fair to say, it didn't?

Lim: Can't say that.

Defense (Coombs): If there weren't an SOP, would be problem?

Lim: Yes. We got an SOP accreditation. I assumed it had an SOP.

Defense (Coombs): Would you be surprised to learn SCIF was not accredited?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): When did that responsibility switch over to Master Sgt. Paul Adkins?

Lim: I want to say 2nd or 3rd week of 2010.

Defense (Coombs): Responsible for day to day infosec of SCIF?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Any SSR training for Master Sgt. Paul Adkins?

Lim: I believe a small class.

Defense (Coombs): There is a proper SSR course?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Is SSR supposed to inventory CDs and DVDs?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Suppose to be externally labeled?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Bear an external form [a classification mark]?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): How it is labeled?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Why?

Lim: That way you don't put a classified disk into an unclassified machine.

Defense (Coombs): I've seen photos of the SCIF with CDs all over the place?

Lim: Haven't seen those photos. At times the SCIF can be disorganized.

Defense (Coombs): When I zoom in to those photos there are unlabeled CDs all over the place. Is that now how it was?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Were soldiers allowed to bring in personal CDs?

Lim: Music CDs that were unopened.

Defense (Coombs): Were you allowed to leave SCIF with CD?

Lim: For official purposes...

Defense (Coombs): How was it enforced?

Lim: No. You trusted people.

Defense (Coombs): Any sort of protocol for soldier burning something onto a disk?

Lim: Someone would review it.

Defense (Coombs): How was that enforced?

Lim: If you don't grab it, you don't take it out...

Defense (Coombs): Music on same computer as SIPRnet? Correct, by rules?

Lim: No Sir.

Defense (Coombs): Watching movies in SCIF?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Movies on SIPRnet played on D6 machine? Games played?

Lim: I did not.

Defense (Coombs): Games stored on SIPRnet?

Lim: Yes.

Defense (Coombs): Programs that had been downloaded by soldiers?

Lim: I did not see.

Defense (Coombs): Ever hear of anyone saying that they had to install applications for products?

Lim: No.

Defense (Coombs): Were you responsible for classification decisions?

Lim: No. It would be the originating authority, who reclassifies information.